Lixin Wei1, Lin Zhang1, Meng Chao2, Xinlei Jia3, Chao Liu1, Lijun Shi1. 1. School of Petroleum Engineering, Northeast Petroleum University, Daqing 163318, China. 2. Gas Production Branch of Daqing Oilfield Co Ltd., Daqing 163453, China. 3. College of Chemical Engineering ashaind Safety, Binzhou University, Binzhou 256600, China.
Abstract
The application of chemical flooding improves the stability of the produced emulsion, which reduces the demulsification efficiency of conventional demulsifiers. To improve the demulsification effect, in this paper, a new multibranched nonanionic polyether demulsifier, FYJP, was prepared by grafting carboxylate based on a nonionic demulsifier. The FYJP demulsifier could generate an initiator through p-tert-butylphenol, triethylenetetramine, and methanol, which was polymerized with ethylene oxide (EO) and propylene oxide (PO) to produce a nonionic polyether demulsifier. Sodium chloroacetate was used to modify the polyether demulsifier to obtain a new type of nonanionic polyether demulsifier. The FYJP polyether demulsifier was characterized by the hydrophilic-lipophilic balance (HLB) value, relative solubility (RSN), and surface activity of the demulsifier, and the demulsification mechanism was analyzed by a microscopic demulsification process test, and the effect of demulsifier dosage on the demulsification effect was discussed. Meanwhile, a dehydration test was carried out. The experimental results showed that the highest dehydration rate of the demulsifier was 94.7% at 85 °C, 100 ppm demulsifier dosage, 50 mL of a W/O emulsion, and 120 min demulsification time. The abovementioned studies show that FYJP is an effective demulsifier for chemical flooding emulsions, and this work promises to provide a reference for future demulsifier research.
The application of chemical flooding improves the stability of the produced emulsion, which reduces the demulsification efficiency of conventional demulsifiers. To improve the demulsification effect, in this paper, a new multibranched nonanionic polyether demulsifier, FYJP, was prepared by grafting carboxylate based on a nonionic demulsifier. The FYJP demulsifier could generate an initiator through p-tert-butylphenol, triethylenetetramine, and methanol, which was polymerized with ethylene oxide (EO) and propylene oxide (PO) to produce a nonionic polyether demulsifier. Sodium chloroacetate was used to modify the polyether demulsifier to obtain a new type of nonanionic polyether demulsifier. The FYJP polyether demulsifier was characterized by the hydrophilic-lipophilic balance (HLB) value, relative solubility (RSN), and surface activity of the demulsifier, and the demulsification mechanism was analyzed by a microscopic demulsification process test, and the effect of demulsifier dosage on the demulsification effect was discussed. Meanwhile, a dehydration test was carried out. The experimental results showed that the highest dehydration rate of the demulsifier was 94.7% at 85 °C, 100 ppm demulsifier dosage, 50 mL of a W/O emulsion, and 120 min demulsification time. The abovementioned studies show that FYJP is an effective demulsifier for chemical flooding emulsions, and this work promises to provide a reference for future demulsifier research.
To improve oil recovery, chemical flooding
has gradually replaced
conventional primary and secondary oil recovery techniques such as
water flooding and gas flooding.[1−3] The use of chemical flooding to
enhance oil recovery has been proven to be effective, and the injection
of chemicals such as surfactants makes the production of emulsions
easier.[4−6] The formation of an emulsion is due to the interaction
of solid impurities, colloids, asphaltene, and other components in
crude oil as well as chemical reagents in the process of crude oil
production and operation, which forms a rigid, viscoelastic, and stable
interface membrane at the oil–water interface.[7−12] This interfacial membrane makes the emulsion very stable.[13,14] The presence of emulsions is hazardous to crude oil production systems,
since water may lead to equipment corrosion, pump malfunction, and
even safety problems.[15,16] Mechanical, electrical, thermal,
and chemical demulsifications are the common demulsification and dehydration
techniques for crude oil. Among them, the chemical demulsification
method has been widely studied because of its rapid and efficient
demulsification.[17−21] Alves et al. analyzed the demulsification activity of a demulsifier
based on a synthetic chemical surfactant of castor oil and discussed
the demulsification mechanism. The maximum water separation of the
demulsifier was about 90% in a bottled experiment.[22] Chen et al. used propylene trimethoxy silane to wrap Fe3O4 in a hyperbranched polyamide and condensation
to synthesize a new magnetic-response demulsifier. By characterization
and demulsification experiment analysis, the new demulsifier was shown
to have good demulsification performance, and the demulsification
efficiency reached 97%.[23] Most chemical
demulsifiers are amphiphilic nonionic surfactants, consisting of hydrophilic
and hydrophobic parts (such as poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) and poly(propylene
oxide) (PPO) blocks of block polyether demulsifiers). A chemical demulsifier
can reduce the tension of an oil–water interface film, has
higher surface activity, is easy to adsorb on the oil–water
interface, and can replace the old, more stable interface film with
an easily breakable interface film to achieve the goal of demulsification
and dehydration.[24−29] However, at the moment, the stability of emulsions is getting higher
and generally nonionic demulsifiers fail to better meet the demulsification
requirements.[30] Therefore, it is necessary
to refine the chemical demulsifiers. The demulsifying effect of a
demulsifier can be improved by physical (compound) or chemical (cross-linking
and chain extension) treatments.[31−33]p-tert-Butylphenol (PTBP) is
a common chemical substance, mainly used in the synthesis of p-tert-butylphenolic resin, which is widely
used in various fields.[34] Because of its
low price and good demulsification effect, it is usually used as one
of the main materials for preparing a polyether demulsifier as a starting
agent. In this paper, a new type of nonanionic demulsifier was prepared
on the basis of nonionic demulsifier, the carboxylic acid was grafted
into the water soluble and oil soluble blocks of nonionic demulsifier
by chain extension chemical teratment, while increasing the molecular
weight of the demulsifier and nonionic retaining the properties of
nonionic part, it can hydrolyze the anion in solution. At the same
time, the demulsifier adsorbed on the oil–water interface replaces
part of the active substances, reduces the strength of the interface
film, further reduces the stability of the emulsion, and increases
the demulsification effect.[35] In this paper,
a new type of nonanionic block polyether demulsifier was prepared
by using a para-tertiary butylphenol (PTBP) initiator;
then, propylene oxide (PO) and ethylene oxide (EO) are used for the
synthesis of a series of nonionic polyether demulsifiers, and finally,
sodium chloroacetate is added to realize successful synthesis of modified
nonanionic block polyether demulsifiers. The demulsifier was characterized
by the hydrophilic–lipophilic balance (HLB) value, relative
solubility (RSN), and surface activity, and the optimal demulsifier
dosage was determined. Finally, a dehydration test was used to determine
the optimal nonanionic block polyether demulsifier. This strategy
can effectively improve the dehydration efficiency of demulsifiers
and provide a reference for demulsification and dehydration of emulsions.
Results
and Discussion
Hydrophilic and Lipophilic Balance HLB, Cloud
Point, and RSN
Values
The abovementioned tests measured the cloud points
of all demulsifiers. Figure a shows the cloud points of all demulsifiers in the FYJP series. Figure b shows the image
of the FYJP1 polyether solution when it reaches the cloud point, and
the change of the solution from transparent to turbid can be clearly
observed. For synthetic polyether demulsifiers with different proportions,
the dehydration of hydrophilic groups holds the key to cause the cloud
point. A longer hydrophilic group chain can enhance hydration and
improve the solubility of the demulsifier, and the cloud point also
increases.[36] On the contrary, the increase
of hydrophobic groups will lead to a decrease in the turbidity point.
It can be seen from the figure that under certain PO conditions, the
cloud point increases with the increase in the EO content. When the
EO content is constant, the cloud point decreases with the increase
in the PO content.[37,38]
Figure 1
(a) Cloud point of the FYJP series demulsifiers
and (b) changes
in the FYJP1 aqueous solution at the cloud point.
(a) Cloud point of the FYJP series demulsifiers
and (b) changes
in the FYJP1 aqueous solution at the cloud point.The HLB value can be calculated by the formula using the measured
cloud points.[7] The HLB value shows the
degree of hydrophilicity or oleophilicity of a polyether demulsifier.
The larger the HLB value, the stronger the hydrophilicity, and the
smaller the HLB value, the stronger the lipophilicity.[44] The relative solubility RSN value is similar
to the HLB value, which is also used to evaluate the hydrophilic and
oleophilic properties of demulsifiers.[39] At present, it is considered that a demulsifier is lipophilic when
the RSN value is less than 13 and hydrophilic when the RSN value is
greater than 17. When the RSN value is in the range of 13–17,
the demulsifier has both lipophilic and hydrophilic properties.[40−42] The calculated HLB values and measured RSN values are shown in Table . As can be seen from
the table, when the PO content is constant, both HLB and RSN values
increase with the increase in the EO content. When the EO content
is constant, the HLB and RSN values decrease with the increase in
the PO content.
Table 1
Cloud Point, HLB Values, and RSN Values
of FYPJ Series Samples
demulsifiers
cloud point (°C)
HLB
RSN
FYJP1
34.5
7.4
15.7
FYJP2
36.4
7.6
16.1
FYJP3
25.3
6.5
13.6
FYJP4
28.6
6.8
14.3
FYJP5
17.3
5.7
11.2
FYJP6
23.2
6.3
11.7
Determination
of Surface Tension
Figure a shows the change curve of surface tension
of a demulsifier at different concentrations in an aqueous solution
at a test temperature of 80 °C. Surface tension is one of the
important properties to evaluate demulsifiers.[43,44] Compared with the blank control experiment, it can be found that
the FYJP series polyether demulsifiers can significantly reduce the
surface tension of the aqueous solution. It can also be seen that
their ability to reduce the surface tension is roughly the same; all
of them can reduce the surface tension of the aqueous solution to
about 32 mN·m–1. This indicates that the surface
activity of the FYJP polyether demulsifier is higher than the surface
activity of a natural emulsifier in the emulsion, which can make the
interfacial tension lower, so that the FYJP polyether demulsifier
can preferentially adsorb on the oil–water interface and replace
the original natural active film, and the interface film formed is
more prone to rupture so as to achieve the demulsification effect.
It can be observed that at a low concentration of the demulsifier,
the surface tension of the aqueous solution decreases rapidly with
an increase in the concentration. When the concentration reaches a
certain level, the decrease in surface tension becomes slow. With
a further increase in the concentration, the surface tension basically
reaches equilibrium. The surface tension curve usually presents double
inflection points.[45] The range between
the double inflection points is the cmc range of a polyether. The
second inflection point is generally considered to be the value of
the polyether cmc.[46,47] Wider molecular weight distribution
of block polyethers, the change of the conformation of molecular segments
at the gas–liquid interface, and the formation of monomolecular
micelles in an aqueous solution before the critical micelle concentration
of polyethers can all lead to the formation of double inflection points.[48,49] Comparing the different FYJP polyether demulsifiers, it can be found
that the cmc value increases with the increase in the EO content when
the PO content is constant. When the EO content is constant, the cmc
value decreases with the increase in the PO content. This is because
when EO increases, the hydrophilicity of polyether increases and the
cmc value increases accordingly. When the PO content increases, the
hydrophobicity of polyether increases, making micelle formation easier
and resulting in the decrease in cmc.[50,51]
Figure 2
(a) FYPJ series
surface tension curves at 80 °C and (b) surface
tension of FYJP1 under different temperature conditions.
(a) FYPJ series
surface tension curves at 80 °C and (b) surface
tension of FYJP1 under different temperature conditions.Figure b
shows
that the surface tension of the FYJP1 aqueous solution changes with
the concentration of polyether at 40, 60, and 80 °C. The surface
tension gradually decreases with an increase in solution temperature
and the cmc significantly decreases, indicating that temperature can
improve the adsorption capacity of the FYJP polyether demulsifier,
thus promoting the micellization of the solution. The first inflection
point decreases with increasing temperature, indicating that the surface
activity of the demulsifier increases with increasing temperature,
thus promoting the ability to reduce surface tension.
Influence of
Demulsifier Dosage on Demulsification Performance
The demulsification
and dehydration experiments of an FYJP polyether
demulsifier with dosages of 20, 50, 100, 150, and 200 ppm were carried
out for 120 min at 85 °C. The experimental data graph is shown
in Figure . As can
be seen from the figure, with the increase in dosage, the dehydration
rate of the FYJP series demulsifiers gradually increases. Among them,
the demulsification rates of FYJP2 and FYJP1 at various concentrations
are higher than those of other FYJP demulsifiers. When the amount
of the demulsifier is low (less than 20 ppm), the dehydration rate
is also low. When the amount of the FYJP demulsifier is increased
(20–100 ppm), the dehydration rate increases rapidly. Finally,
when the dosage of the FYJP demulsifier is greater than 100 ppm, although
the dehydration rate is still increasing, it is extremely slow and
even tends to balance. This is because the higher the amount or concentration
of the polyether demulsifier, the lower the interfacial tension at
the oil–water interface, the lower the strength of the interfacial
film at the oil–water interface, and the easier the demulsification
and dehydration.[52] When the amount or concentration
of the polyether demulsifier increases, the interfacial tension of
oil and water decreases slowly, and the increase in the dehydration
rate also slows down.[53,54] Although a high dosage or a high
concentration of the FYJP demulsifier has a high dehydration rate,
the cost of demulsification also increases due to the large increase
in dosage of the demulsifier. To sum up, the optimal dosage of the
FYJP polyether demulsifier is 100 ppm.
Figure 3
Effect of dosage on FYJP
demulsification performance.
Effect of dosage on FYJP
demulsification performance.
Demulsification Test
The moisture content of a crude
oil emulsion measured by the distillation method is 23%. The demulsifier
dosage of 100 ppm and the demulsifier temperature of 85 °C were
set to conduct demulsification and dehydration tests on the synthesized
YJP series and FYJP series demulsifiers. The amount of water removed
from the tube during different time periods and the calculated dehydration
rate were recorded. The experimental results are shown in Figures and 5.
Figure 4
(a) Dehydration rate of FYJP demulsifiers in different time periods,
(b) dehydration of FYJP series demulsifiers in different time periods,
and (c) dehydration results of FYJP series demulsifiers at 120 min.
Figure 5
Dehydration rate of YJP demulsifiers in different time
periods.
(a) Dehydration rate of FYJP demulsifiers in different time periods,
(b) dehydration of FYJP series demulsifiers in different time periods,
and (c) dehydration results of FYJP series demulsifiers at 120 min.Dehydration rate of YJP demulsifiers in different time
periods.Figure a shows
the dehydration rate of FYJP demulsifiers in different time periods,
and Figure b intuitively
reflects the amount of dehydration in each time period. The dehydration
rate of FYJP demulsifiers increased the fastest in the first 60 min,
and all of the other dehydration rates except that of FYJP5 were more
than 65%. Moreover, according to Figure b, it can be seen that the amount of dehydration
was most in the first 30 min, among which the dehydration rate of
FYJP2 in 30 min was more than 40%, and its dehydration rate in 60
min was more than 80%. However, FYJP5 had the lowest dehydration rate,
which was only 57% at 60 min. In two time periods of 60–90
min and 90–120 min, the amount of dehydration decreased, and
the increase in the dehydration rate of the FYJP series demulsifiers
decreased. The overall demulsification rate of the final modified
FYJP polyether demulsifier was above 70%, and the dehydration rate
of FYJP2 was the highest, reaching 94.7%.Figure c shows
the demulsification results of a W/O crude oil emulsion in Liaohe
Oilfield by FYJP demulsifiers. It can be seen that the amount of dehydration
of FYJP2 is significantly higher than that of the others by comparing
the six test tubes. The demulsification and dehydration capacity was
in the order FYJP2 > FYJP1 > FYJP4 > FYJP3 > FYJP6 >
FYJP5. By comparing
FYJP1, FYJP2, FYJP3, and FYJP4 in Figure a,c, it can be seen that when the PO content
is constant, the amount of dehydration and the dehydration rate increase
significantly as the EO content increases. This is because the hydrophilicity
of the polyether demulsifier increases with the increase in the proportion
of EO.[55,56] The improvement of hydrophilicity makes
the demulsifier reach the oil–water surface faster, the surface
tension of the oil–water interface is weakened, the strength
of the interface membrane of the oil–water interface is reduced,
and the dehydration rate is increased. But greater hydrophilicity
is not always better. When the hydrophilic energy is too large, the
amount of the demulsifier dissolved in water increases, which reduces
the amount of the demulsifier adsorbed on the oil–water interface,
resulting in a lower dehydration rate. Only when the hydrophilicity
is a certain value do the dehydration rate and the demulsification
rate reach the highest values.As can be seen from Figure , the overall demulsification
rate of an unmodified YJP polyether
demulsifier is less than 70%, and YJP2 has the highest dehydration
rate, which is only 68%. As can be seen from the comparison between Figures a and 5, the overall demulsification rate of the modified FYJP polyether
demulsifier is more than 70%, with the highest reaching 94.7%. However,
the overall demulsification rate of the unmodified YJP polyether demulsifier
is less than 70%, and the overall demulsification rate of the FYJPpolyether demulsifier is much higher than that of the YJP polyether
demulsifier. This indicates that the demulsification performance of
the modified demulsifier is better than that of the unmodified polyether
demulsifier. At the same time, in terms of modified or unmodified
polyether demulsifiers, the demulsification capacity of demulsifier
no. 2 is higher than other types.
Microscopic Demulsification
Process
The microscopic
demulsification process of a W/O emulsion can be clearly observed
in Figure . The dehydration
ability of the FYJP demulsifier is excellent. The emulsion was very
stable and the small water droplets were enveloped in the oil phase.
At 30 min, demulsifier molecules began to adsorb on the oil–water
interface film. The hydrophilic group extended to the water phase
to attract small water droplets around. The hydrophobic group extended
to the oil phase to replace natural emulsifiers such as asphaltene
and reduced the thickness of the interface film. At 60 min, demulsifier
molecules stretched on the oil–water interface and small water
droplets combined to form large water droplets, which began to settle
at the bottom of the test tube. At 90 min, the separation of oil and
water in the W/O emulsion was stable and the number of water droplets
decreased. At 120 min, the dehydration was completed, only small-diameter
water droplets were left free in the emulsion, and almost no large
water droplets were left.
Figure 6
Microscopic demulsification process.
Microscopic demulsification process.
Demulsification Mechanism
When the demulsifier is dispersed
into the emulsion, due to its high surface activity and hydrophilic
and oleophilic properties, it passes through the external phase of
the emulsion to reach the oil–water interface and is adsorbed.
The hydrophilic end of the demulsifier is adsorbed in the water layer,
and the oil–water end is inserted into the oil layer. A large
amount of the demulsifier is adsorbed on the oil–water surface
at the same time to form a new layer of an oil–water interface
membrane. The phenomenon of displacing or replacing the old interfacial
membrane occurs. At the same time, in the state of external action,
such as stirring, heating, etc., the new interfacial membrane ruptures
due to its less stable nature. As a result, water droplets in the
inner phase enter the outer phase and coalesce with other water droplets.
When the droplets coalesce to a certain extent, they settle slowly
under the action of gravity and form a water layer at the bottom to
realize oil–water separation. With the decrease of water droplets
in the emulsion, the coalescence probability of the remaining water
droplets decreases, and the sedimentation rate of the bottom water
phase slows down until the equilibrium demulsification is achieved. Figure shows the demulsification
mechanism diagram.
Figure 7
Demulsification mechanism diagram.
Demulsification mechanism diagram.
Conclusions
The preparation of an efficient demulsifier
is essential for the
demulsification and dehydration of an emulsion. In this paper, a new
nonanionic polyether demulsifier was successfully synthesized and
characterized. The measurement of the surface tension showed that
the demulsifier features high surface activity and can effectively
reduce the surface tension. The analyses of the cloud point, HLB values,
and RSN values showed that the overall dehydration rate and demulsification
efficiency of the demulsifier increased as the hydrophilicity increased
but did not exceed a certain value. The microscopic demulsification
process of the demulsifier was studied, and it was proved that the
FYJP demulsifier had fast diffusion and adsorption at the oil–water
interface and excellent demulsification ability. The demulsification
test illustrated that the demulsification performance of the modified
demulsifier was much higher than that of the unmodified demulsifier.
Alongside that, the optimal dosage of 100 ppm was determined by comparing
and analyzing the dosage of different demulsifiers. The best demulsifier,
FYJP2, was selected by a demulsification and dehydration test. The
highest dehydration rate of the demulsifier was 94.7% at 85 °C,
100 ppm demulsifier dosage, and 120 min demulsification time.
Experimental
Section
Materials
EO and PO were provided by the laboratory,
methanol, p-tert-butylphenol (PTBP),
potassium hydroxide, and formaldehyde (40 wt %) were purchased from
Tianjin Tianli Chemical Reagent Co., Ltd, and triethylenetetramine
was purchased from Tianjin Cameo Chemical Reagent Co., Ltd. In addition,
sodium chloroacetate was provided by the Tianjin Damao Chemical Reagent
Factory. All of the abovementioned drugs and reagents were of analytically
pure grade. The physicochemical properties of the crude oil taken
from Liaohe Oilfield are shown in Table .
Table 2
Basic Physical Properties
of Crude
Oil Produced in a Block of Liaohe Oilfield
density (kg·m–3)
dynamic viscosity
(50 °C) (mPa·s)
gum (%)
asphaltene (%)
acid value (mgKOH·g–1)
pour point (°C)
sulfur content (%)
920.6
219.1
14.34
8.47
1.93
16
0.158
Synthesis of Nonionic Polyether
Demulsifiers
To begin
with, 30 g of p-tert-butylphenol
(PTBP) and 58.4 g of triethylenetetramine were put into a three-neck
flask, which was placed in an oil bath and heated to 50 °C. After
15 min of heat preservation, 30 g (40 wt %) of formaldehyde solution
was slowly added into three three-mouth flask using a separating funnel.
After dripping, the solution was kept warm for 30 min. Then, 60 g
of methanol was poured into the flask on which the condensing reflux
device was installed, and the oil bath temperature was increased to
110 °C for reflux dehydration for 2 h. After that, the temperature
was increased to 150 °C again to steam out the methanol. During
the process of a 1 h reaction, the material transparency in the flask
needed to be observed. The final step was to cool the flask and pour
out the internal solution to get the initiator.A total of 5
g of the initiator obtained from the above reaction and 0.70 g of
potassium hydroxide were added to the reactor with high temperature
and high pressure. N2 was employed to replace the air in
the reactor. The gas in the high-pressure reactor was pumped out by
a vacuum pump, and the pressure indicator was observed to stop when
it reached negative pressure. Overall, 345 g of epoxy propane (PO)
was slowly fed into the feed port and heated to 130 °C, and the
pressure gauge reading was maintained at about 0.2 MPa. The feed valve
was closed when the feed was completely finished. The first step of
the reaction ended when the pressure indicator was reduced to negative
pressure.Following the first step of the experiment, 0.71 g
of potassium
hydroxide was put in the high-pressure reactor again, and 127.8 g
of ethylene oxide (EO) was passed into the reactor in the same way
for the polymerization reaction, and finally the nonionic polyether
demulsifier YJP1 was obtained by cooling and opening the reactor;
the mass ratio of its initiator to propylene oxide (PO) was 1:69,
and the mass ratio of propylene oxide (PO) to ethylene oxide (EO)
was 2.7:1.In each experiment, the mass ratios of the initiator
to propylene
oxide (PO) were 1:69, 1:99, and 1:159. The mass ratios of propylene
oxide (PO) and ethylene oxide (EO) were 2.7:1 and 3.7:1.Figure shows the
specific polymerization formula of demulsifiers, and Table shows the synthesis ratio of
the YJP demulsifiers.
Figure 8
Polymerization formula of demulsifiers.
Table 3
Synthesis Ratio of the YJP Demulsifiers
demulsifier sample
initiator/PO
PO/EO
demulsifier sample
initiator/PO
PO/EO
YJP1
1:69
3.7:1
YJP4
1:99
2.7:1
YJP2
1:69
2.7:1
YJP5
1:159
3.7:1
YJP3
1:99
3.7:1
YJP6
1:159
2.7:1
Polymerization formula of demulsifiers.
Modification of the Nonionic Polyether Demulsifiers
A total of 20 g of a nonionic polyether demulsifier was added to
a three-neck flask, which was placed in an oil bath, stirred, and
heated to 50 °C. Next, 0.6 g (40 wt %) of potassium hydroxide
solution was added with a gel head dropper and stirred for 20 min
at 150 rpm. The temperature was increased again to 65 °C, and
1.3 g (30 wt %) of sodium chloroacetic acid solution was slowly added
with a separating funnel, and the drip was finished at about 2.5 h
with a controlled drip acceleration. After dripping, the temperature
was increased to 85 °C, and the reaction ended after 8 h of heat
preservation. After cooling, water and methanol were added to prepare
50 wt % of the sample to obtain the FYJP nonanionic polyether demulsifier.
In the configuration of 30 wt % sodium chloroacetate solution, the
mass ratio of sodium chloroacetate, methanol, and water was 10:16.3:7.Figure shows the
modification reaction equation of the nonionic polyether demulsifier. Figure shows a schematic
diagram of the chemical synthesis of the FYJP nonanionic polyether
demulsifier.
Figure 9
Modification equation of the polyether demulsifier.
Figure 10
Schematic diagram of chemical synthesis of modified polyether
demulsifiers.
Modification equation of the polyether demulsifier.Schematic diagram of chemical synthesis of modified polyether
demulsifiers.
Determination of the Cloud
Point and the HLB Value of the Demulsifiers
The turbidity
point method is used to measure the turbidity point
of nonanion polyether demulsifiers. The FYJP synthetic nonanionic
polyether demulsifier was configured as a 10 wt % aqueous solution
in a test tube; the thermometer was mounted on the test tube, and
the height of the liquid level was controlled at 70 mm. The tubes
were heated in an oil bath, controlled for a gradual increase in temperature,
and the solution was observed. When the solution appeared cloudy,
the value on the thermometer needed to be read quickly. After cooling
the tube to room temperature, the abovementioned experimental steps
were repeated and the data were obtained. All of the data were collated
and averaged to obtain the cloud point of the demulsifier.The
hydrophilic–lipophilic balance (HLB) value of polyether demulsifiers
has a certain quantitative relationship with the cloud point. The
HLB value can be calculated from the cloud points obtained in the
abovementioned experiments, and the calculation formula is shown as eq .[57]X is the cloud point value
of the 10 wt % FYJP polyether demulsifier.
Determination of Relative
Solubility (RSN) of Demulsifiers
A total of 30 mL of the
prepared titration solution (mixed with
2.6 vol % toluene and 97.4 vol % ethylene glycol dimethyl ether) was
poured into a beaker, and 1 g of the polyether demulsifier was dropped,
stirred with a glass rod until the mixture was uniform, titrated with
distilled water until the solution became turbid for 1 min or longer,
and the volume of titrated distilled water was recorded, which was
the RSN value of the demulsifier.
Determination of Interfacial
Tension of Demulsifiers
A Kruss DSA100 contact angle measuring
instrument was used for measuring
modified polyether demulsifiers. The polyether aqueous solutions with
different concentrations were heated in a water bath after being prepared
and then measured at a set temperature of 80 °C. A 1 mL disposable
syringe was selected as the instrument of the hanging drop method
to measure the interfacial tension of polyether aqueous solutions
with different concentrations.
Experiment on Demulsification
and Dehydration of the Demulsifiers
Preparation experiment
of the W/O crude oil emulsion: A certain
amount of crude oil and sewage was weighed and preheated at 65 °C
for 1 h. The mixer was started and sewage was gradually added into
the crude oil at a stirring speed of 7000 rpm. After adding water
and stirring for 15 min, a stable W/O crude oil emulsion was obtained.Determination of the moisture content of the W/O type crude oil
emulsion by distillation: The emulsion was heated to flow at 65 °C
and poured into a round-bottom flask containing dieseloil with a
few shards of porcelain at the bottom to prevent the liquid from boiling
over. The condensing tube and the receiver were installed, the distillation
flask was heated in a constant temperature oil bath, and the drop
rate of the condensate was controlled to approximately 4 drops/s until
there was no more water in the distillation unit and the volume of
the liquid in the receiver had not changed for a period of time. Next,
heating was stopped and then the mixture was cooled to room temperature.
The water droplets attached to the receiver were scraped into the
liquid with a tool, and the volume of water in the receiver was read.
The volume fraction of water in the crude oil emulsion was calculated
according to formula .[58]φ is the
volume fraction of water, V1 is the volume
of separated water of the blank
experimental control, V0 is the volume
of separated water in the receiver, and V is the
volume of the crude oil emulsion.The demulsification temperature
was selected as 85 °C, which
was consistent with the actual demulsification temperature in the
oil plant. The emulsion was heated in a water bath until it began
to flow, and the upper emulsion was placed in a beaker and put into
an electric stirrer at a speed of 2000 rpm for 8 min and then put
aside for 5 min; then, 50 mL was poured into a tapered graduated tube.
A small amount of the FYJP nonanionic polyether demulsifier was added
to the test tube; the test tube was shaken by hand 150 times and heated
in a water bath at the temperature specified above. Each tapered scale
tube retained a set of blank controls to record the volume of water
released at different times. The demulsification efficiency can be
calculated by the volume of demulsified water and the volume of water
in the emulsion, as shown in eq .[41]W is the demulsification
rate of the demulsifier for the heavy oil emulsion, Vr is the volume of water from the emulsion, and Vw is the volume of emulsion dehydration under
the action of the demulsifier.Figure shows
a schematic diagram of the demulsification and dehydration experiment.
Figure 11
Schematic
diagram of the demulsification and dehydration experiment.
Schematic
diagram of the demulsification and dehydration experiment.
Microscopic Demulsification Process Test
A W/O emulsion
with 0.1 g L–1 FYJP demulsifier was evenly spread
on the glass slides at 25 °C. A BH-2 microscope was used for
observation. Microdemulsifier processes at different time periods
were recorded using SPECTRUMSEE-ADVANCE software.
Authors: Krassimir D Danov; Peter A Kralchevsky; Simeon D Stoyanov; Joanne L Cook; Ian P Stott Journal: J Colloid Interface Sci Date: 2019-05-07 Impact factor: 8.128
Authors: Angelika Klaus; Gordon J T Tiddy; Reinhard Rachel; Anh Phong Trinh; Eva Maurer; Didier Touraud; Werner Kunz Journal: Langmuir Date: 2011-03-28 Impact factor: 3.882